A prospective randomized double-blind study of pain control by topical calcium channel blockers versus placebo after Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy

Safety and Efficacy of Oral Nalbuphine on Postoperative Pain in Hemorrhoidectomy Patients: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Pivotal Trial

OBJECTIVES

Severe postoperative pain requiring opioid treatment has been reported in 20% to 40% of hemorrhoidectomy patients. Compared with morphine, nalbuphine offers better hemodynamic stability, a lower risk of respiratory depression, and a lower potential for addiction. Nalbuphine was developed from the intravenous form into an oral form (PHN131) to alleviate moderate-to-severe pain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose, parallel-design trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of PHN131 in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either PHN131 soft capsules containing nalbuphine hydrochloride 60 mg or placebo capsules. Intramuscular diclofenac was the rescue analgesic. Pain was measured by the area under the curve of mean Visual Analog Scale pain intensity scores.

RESULTS

Visual Analog Scale results in patients receiving PHN131 were significantly lower than placebo group scores through 48 hours postoperatively (149.2±75.52 vs. 179.6±65.97; P =0.0301). According to Brief Pain Inventory Short-Form scores, the impact of pain on quality of life was significantly smaller for the PHN131 group than for the placebo group. Time to the first use of diclofenac postoperatively was significantly longer in the PHN131 group than in the placebo group. The cumulative dosage of diclofenac in the PHN131 group was only around half of that in the placebo group ( P <0.0001). Drug-related adverse events were mild-to-moderate and resolved by the treatment end. No drug-related severe adverse events were observed.

DISCUSSION

Our findings demonstrate that PHN131 is effective and well-tolerated in the treatment of moderate-to-severe post hemorrhoidectomy pain and may provide another option for patients to control their pain.

Comparison of ointment-based agents after excisional procedures for hemorrhoidal disease: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Efficient postoperative pain control is important after hemorrhoidal surgery. Although several locally applied medications have been used, current evidence regarding the optimal strategy is still conflicting. This network meta-analysis assessed analgesic efficacy and safety of the various topical medications in patients submitted to excisional procedures for hemorrhoids.

METHODS

The present study followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the PRISMA guidelines. The last systematic literature screening was performed at 15 June 2023. Comparisons were based on a random effects multivariate network meta-analysis under a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

Overall, 26 RCTs and 2132 patients were included. Regarding postoperative pain, EMLA cream (surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) 80.3%) had the highest ranking at 12-h endpoint, while aloe vera cream (SUCRA 82.36%) scored first at 24 h. Metronidazole ointments had the highest scores at 7 and 14 days postoperatively. Aloe vera had the best analgesic profile (24-h SUCRA 84.8% and 48-h SUCRA 80.6%) during defecation. Lidocaine (SUCRA 87.9%) displayed the best performance regarding overall morbidity rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to the inconclusive results and several study limitations, further RCTs are required.

Topical Lidocaine or Lidocaine/Diltiazem Ointment Following Rubber Band Ligation of Hemorrhoids: A Prospective 3-Armed Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Rubber band ligation of hemorrhoids causes less pain than excisional hemorrhoidectomy, but many patients still experience significant postprocedure discomfort.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine whether topical lidocaine, with or without diltiazem, is more effective than placebo for analgesia after hemorrhoid banding.

DESIGN

This is a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Patients were randomly assigned to 2% lidocaine, 2% lidocaine with 2% diltiazem, or a placebo ointment.

SETTINGS

This study was performed at 2 university public teaching hospitals and 2 private hospitals in Australia.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients aged ≥18 years undergoing hemorrhoid banding were selected.

INTERVENTIONS

Topical ointments were applied postprocedure 3× daily for 5 days.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Visual analog pain score, opiate analgesia usage, and patient satisfaction were the main outcome measures.

RESULTS

Of 159 eligible patients, 99 were randomly assigned (33 in each group). Pain scores were reduced at 1 hour for the lidocaine (OR 4.15 [1.12-15.41]; p = 0.03) and lidocaine/diltiazem groups (OR 3.85 [1.05-14.11]; p = 0.04) compared with placebo. Patients in the lidocaine/diltiazem group had improved satisfaction (OR 3.82 [1.28-11.44]; p = 0.02) and were more likely to recommend the procedure to others (OR 9.33 [1.07-81.72]; p = 0.04). Patients in the lidocaine/diltiazem group required approximately 45% less total and in-hospital analgesia compared with the placebo. There was no difference in complications between any of the groups.

LIMITATIONS

A cost/benefit analysis was not performed. Analgesic efficacy appeared to be short term and the procedures were performed only in the hospital/nonambulatory setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical lidocaine reduced short-term analgesia use, whereas combination lidocaine/diltiazem was associated with both improved analgesia and patient satisfaction after hemorrhoid banding.

LIDOCANA TPICA O UNGENTO DE LIDOCANA/DILTIAZEM DESPUS DE LA LIGADURA HEMORROIDAL CON BANDA ELSTICA UN ENSAYO PROSPECTIVO CONTROLADO Y ALEATORIZADO DE TRES BRAZOS

ANTECEDENTES:La ligadura de hemorroides con banda elástica causa menos dolor que la hemorroidectomía escisional, pero muchos pacientes siguen experimentando molestias significativas tras el procedimiento.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo determinar si la lidocaína tópica, con o sin diltiazem, es más eficaz que el placebo para la analgesia tras la ligadura hemorroidal.DISEÑO:Este es un ensayo prospectivo, aleatorizado, doble ciego, controlado con placebo. Los pacientes fueron aleatorizados para recibir lidocaína al 2 %, lidocaína al 2 % con diltiazem al 2 % o ungüento de placebo.AJUSTES:Este estudio se realizó en dos hospitales públicos con docencia universitaria y dos hospitales privados en Australia.PACIENTES:Se seleccionaron pacientes consecutivos de ≥18 años sometidos a ligadura para hemorroides.INTERVENCIONES:Se aplicaron ungüentos tópicos tras el procedimiento tres veces al día durante 5 días.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La puntuación analógica visual del dolor, el uso de analgésicos opiáceos y la satisfacción del paciente fueron las principales medidas de resultado.RESULTADOS:De 159 pacientes elegibles, 99 fueron aleatorizados (33 en cada grupo). Las puntuaciones de dolor se redujeron a la hora para los grupos de lidocaína (OR 4,15 (1,12-15,41); p = 0,03) y lidocaína/diltiazem (OR 3,85 (1,05-14,11), p = 0,04) en comparación con el placebo.Los pacientes del grupo de lidocaína/diltiazem mejoraron su satisfacción (OR 3,82 (1,28-11,44), p = 0,02) y eran más propensos de recomendar el procedimiento a otros (OR 9,33 (1,07-81,72), p = 0,04). Los pacientes del grupo de lidocaína/diltiazem requirieron aproximadamente un 45 % menos de analgesia total e intrahospitalaria en comparación con el grupo de placebo. No hubo diferencia en las complicaciones entre ninguno de los grupos.LIMITACIONES:No se realizó un análisis de costo/beneficio. La eficacia analgésica pareció ser a corto plazo y los procedimientos solo se realizaron en el hospital/entorno no ambulatorio.CONCLUSIÓN:La lidocaína tópica mejora la analgesia a corto plazo, mientras que la combinación de lidocaína/diltiazem se asocia tanto con una mejor analgesia como con la satisfacción del paciente tras la colocación de bandas para hemorroides. (Traducción-Dr Osvaldo Gauto ).

PROSPECT guideline for haemorrhoid surgery: A systematic review and procedure-specific postoperative pain management recommendations

BACKGROUND

Haemorrhoidectomy is associated with moderate-to-severe postoperative pain.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to assess the available literature and update previous PROSPECT (procedure specific postoperative pain management) recommendations for optimal pain management after haemorrhoidectomy.

DESIGN AND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

A systematic review utilising PROSPECT methodology was undertaken.

DATA SOURCES

Randomised controlled trials published in the English language from January 1, 2016 to February 2, 2022 assessing postoperative pain using analgesic, anaesthetic, and surgical interventions were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Database.

RESULTS

Of the 371 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified, 84 RCTs and 19 systematic reviews, meta-analyses met our inclusion criteria (103 publications). Interventions that improved postoperative pain relief included: paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitors, systemic steroids, pudendal nerve block, topical metronidazole, topical diltiazem, topical sucralfate or topical glyceryl trinitrate, and intramuscular injection of botulinum toxin.

DISCUSSION

This review has updated the previous recommendations written by our group. Important changes are abandoning oral metronidazole and recommending topical metronidazole, topical diltiazem, topical sucralfate, topical glyceryl trinitrate. Botulinum toxin can also be administered. Contemporary publications confirm the analgesic effect of bilateral pudendal nerve block but invalidate recommendations on perianal infiltration. The choice of the surgery is mostly left to the discretion of the surgeons based on their experience, expertise, type of haemorrhoids, and risk of relapse. That said, excisional surgery is more painful than other procedures.

Chemical sphincterotomy in posthemorrhoidectomy pain relief: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate the pain relief function of chemical sphincterotomy in patients undergoing haemorrhoid surgery and compare, through a meta-analysis, the different drugs used to treat this condition.

METHODS

We conducted a search in databases including PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. The methodological quality was evaluated using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (ROB2). The pain score was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) on day 1, day 2, and day 7, and a meta-analysis was conducted based on the use of random effects models. In addition, the subgroup analysis was evaluated based on the kind of experimental drugs. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with a total of 681 patients were included in this meta-analysis, and all studies were randomized controlled trials RCTs. Chemical sphincterotomy showed better pain relief function than placebo on day 1 (SMD: 1.16, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.80), day 2 (SMD: 2.12, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.87) and day 7 (SMD: 1.97, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.77) after surgery. In the subgroup meta-analysis, we found that different drugs for chemical sphincterotomy provided different pain relief.

CONCLUSION

Chemical sphincterotomy effectively relieves pain after haemorrhoidectomy, and calcium channel blockers have the best effect.

Comparing the efficacy and safety of different analgesic strategies after open hemorrhoidectomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of different analgesic interventions in the treatment of pain after open hemorrhoidectomy by systematic review and network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CNKI, WANFANG DATA, and VIP were searched from the date of database construction to June 28, 2022.

RESULTS

Among the 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 731 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. Most interventions are more effective than placebo in relieving postoperative pain. 24 h postoperative Visual Analogue Scale (VAS): glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) (mean difference (MD) - 4.20, 95% CI - 5.35, - 3.05), diltiazem (MD - 1.97, 95% CI - 2.44, - 1.51), botulinum toxin (BT) (MD - 1.50, 95% CI - 2.25, - 0.75), sucralfate (MD - 1.01, 95% CI - 1.53, - 0.49), and electroacupuncture (EA) (MD - 0.45, 95% CI - 0.87, - 0.04). 48 h postoperative VAS: diltiazem (MD - 2.45, 95% CI - 2.74, - 2.15), BT (MD - 2.18, 95% CI - 2.52, - 1.84), and sucralfate (MD - 1.41, 95% CI - 1.85, - 0.97). 7 d postoperative VAS: diltiazem (MD - 2.49, 95% CI - 3.20, - 1.78) and sucralfate (MD - 1.42, 95% CI - 2.00, - 0.85). The first postoperative defecation VAS: EA (MD - 0.70, 95% CI - 0.95, - 0.46). There are few data on intervention safety, and additional high-quality RCTs are expected to study this topic in the future.

CONCLUSION

Diltiazem ointment may be the most effective medication for pain relief following open hemorrhoidectomy, and it can dramatically reduce pain within one week of surgery. The second and third recommended medications are BT and sucralfate ointment. GTN has a significant advantage in alleviating pain 24 h after open hemorrhoidectomy, but whether it causes headache is debatable; thus, it should be used with caution. EA's analgesic efficacy is still unknown. There was limited evidence on the safety of the intervention in this study, and it was simply presented statistically.

Early and midterm results of radiofrequency ablation (Rafaelo® procedure) for third-degree haemorrhoids: a prospective, two-centre study

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for treating third degree haemorrhoids, with a follow-up over 2 years.

Methods

We conducted a prospective, two-centre study to assess RFA of third-degree haemorrhoids in an outpatient setting. Treatment was performed under local anaesthesia, optionally in combination with sedation. The primary endpoint was analysis of a proctological symptom score ([PSS] bleeding, itching, pain, soiling) and proctological examination to detect recurrence at 1, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery. The secondary endpoints were postoperative complications, incidence of postoperative pain, including administration of analgesics and time to return to daily routine.

Results

Ninety-eight patients were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 49.1 ± 10.9 (mean ± SD). 83 patients (84.7%) were male and 15 patients (15.3%) were female. The follow-up involved 100% (1 month), 95% (6 months), 86% (12 months) and 74% after 24 months. The individual symptom scores and overall PSS score decreased significantly in comparison to the initial score at each time point assessed. Prolapsed haemorrhoids decreased in comparison to the initial situation (100%) to 7.2% (1 month), 3.5% (6 months), 13.1% (12 months) and 13.7% (after 24 months). Thirteen patients (12.7%) required repeat haemorrhoid therapy during the 2-year follow-up period. The mean maximum pain score after the procedure was 2.5 ± 2.7 (determined with the visual analogue scale), while 33 (33.7%) patients reported having no pain. 59 (60.2%) patients did not take analgesics after the procedure. Eleven patients (11.2%) experienced minor complications (bleeding, fever, cramps, diarrhoea, anal venous thrombosis) but did not require additional treatment. Eight cases (8.2%) of major complications (infection, bleeding, severe pain) required treatment with antibiotics, a second intervention, analgesics or hospitalization.

Conclusions

RFA is safe and effective for treatment of third-degree haemorrhoids. The main advantages of this new method are its use on an outpatient basis under local anaesthesia, a very low level of postoperative pain and significant control of haemorrhoid symptoms over 2 years.

Still a Case of "No Pain, No Gain"? An Updated and Critical Review of the Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Management Options for Hemorrhoids in 2020

The treatment of haemorrhoids remains challenging: multiple treatment options supported by heterogeneous evidence are available, but patients rightly demand a tailored approach. Evidence for newer surgical techniques that promise to be less painful has been conflicting. We review the current evidence for management options in patients who present with varying haemorrhoidal grades. A review of the English literature was performed utilizing MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases (31 May 2019). The search terms (haemorrhoid OR haemorrhoid OR haemorrhoids OR haemorrhoids OR "Hemorrhoid"[Mesh]) were used. First- and second-degree haemorrhoids continue to be managed conservatively. The easily repeatable and cost-efficient rubber band ligation is the preferred method to address minor haemorrhoids; long-term outcomes following injection sclerotherapy remain poor. Conventional haemorrhoidectomies (Ferguson/Milligan-Morgan/Ligasure haemorrhoidectomy) still have their role in third- and fourth-degree haemorrhoids, being associated with lowest recurrence; nevertheless, posthaemorrhoidectomy pain is problematic. Stapled haemorrhoidopexy allows quicker recovery, albeit at the costs of higher recurrence rates and potentially serious complications. Transanal Haemorrhoidal Dearterialization has been promoted as nonexcisional and less invasive, but the recent HubBLe trial has questioned its overall place in haemorrhoid management. Novel "walk-in-walk-out" techniques such as radiofrequency ablations or laser treatments will need further evaluation to define their role in modern-day haemorrhoid management. There are numerous treatment options for haemorrhoids, each with their own evidence-base. Newer techniques promise to be less painful, but recurrence rates remain an issue. The balance continues to be sought between long-term efficacy, minimisation of postoperative pain, and preservation of anorectal function.

Topical analgesia following excisional haemorrhoidectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

PURPOSE

Post-operative pain following excisional haemorrhoidectomy poses a particular challenge for patient recovery, as well as a burden on hospital resources. There appears to be an increasing role for topical agents to improve this pain, but their efficacy and safety have not been fully assessed. This systematic review aims to assess all topical agents used for pain following excisional haemorrhoidectomy.

METHODS

The study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two authors independently assessed MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases to 27 June 2019. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in English that investigated topical agents following excisional haemorrhoidectomy were included. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager, version 5.3.

RESULTS

A total of 3639 records were identified. A final 32 RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis. Meta-analysis was performed on 9 RCTs that investigated glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) (5 for diltiazem, 2 for metronidazole and 2 for sucralfate). There were mixed significant changes in pain for GTN compared with placebo. Diltiazem resulted in significant reduction of pain on post-operative days 1, 2, 3 and 7 (p < 0.00001). Metronidazole resulted in significant reduction of pain on days 1 (p = 0.009), 7 (p = 0.002) and 14 (p < 0.00001). Sucralfate resulted in signification reduction of pain on days 7 and 14 (both p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Topical diltiazem, metronidazole and sucralfate appear to significantly reduce pain at various timepoints following excisional haemorrhoidectomy. GTN had mixed evidence. Several single trials identified other promising topical analgesics.